I hate editing events. Seriously. I love going to events and shooting the goings-on (I predominantly shoot runways), but the after process /kills/ me. I don't mind it if the fashion show is well lit, and the lighting is done well, but most of the time here I struggle because it's so dark!
not subject but i find it hair-ripping when I have dust on my lens or sensor. And especially if the dust specks are on top of power lines AGH things are wosre considering that in cyprus I CAN'T FIND ANY PROFESSIONAL WHO CLEANS CAMERA CENSORS!!!
no Im comnplaining about dust specks in geenral,but they are even more abbo0ying when they are on power lines and I have to clean them up with the power line slooking untouched. Powerlines not being the main subject, but I photograph views outside windiws when I photograph apartments and those are always present
There are all kinds of ways of hiding bad skin in camera, with makeup, and so on. If you are shooting in b&w, for example, you can use a grainy film (hides coarse skin texture), use an orange or red filter (hides pimples, freckles and scars), or even use infrared film (shoots the layer just beneath the skin surface). Then there is always makeup. There are even some rather more complicated things you can do to get rid of things like stretch marks, moles, warts, birth marks and cellulite.
makeup isn't going to hide flaky dry skin. I've worked with makeup a lot, I know how useful is can be but when there's a kid involved I'm not gonna go slap foundation all over it - but as I've said, I'm not shooting babies anymore... now I'll just have to pray adults and teens don't do horrible makeup - but that's still easier to fix than an entire baby by time you fix the texture, tones and even the skin all together... Just ain't my cup of tea.
-facepalm- This isn't a debate about makeup. A dead person is still going to look dead, you can put as much blush on Kiersten Stewart as you want and she's still going to look emotionless. It can lessen the appearance of scars and bumps and "imperfections" but that doesn't make them not be there.
I'm not even sure why you're even talking about makeup because the skin issue was about a BABY whose mother failed at putting lotion on it I guess even though she knew the shoot was happening way in advance.
Makeup is fucking amazing and some MUA's should go have illusionist shows in Vegas, but it is not a miracle maker and ANY makeup artist will tell you that.
We are talking about it because you made the sweeping (and entirely incorrect) statement that "Bad skin is bad skin is bad skin, you'll never get rid of that in a camera ...". I know this to be untrue, because I have done it, many times. Between my MUA and myself I have also gotten rid of scars, birthmarks, cellulite, stretch marks, pimples, bad tattoos, and other problems. Yeah, some of those things are a lot of work, but it absolutely can be done.
Well bad skin is obviously just one example. But do you understand what she's getting at? Granted, she does wedding photography (mainly), so it's a little easier to get people who are very pretty and looking fabulous, but she also does a lot of candid shoots using only film.
Bad skin is bad skin is bad skin [...] nobody wants that on their newborn shots.
Most newborns look ugly as hell anyway (my opinion). I know for a fact most parents have photos of their child(ren) with food smeared all around their mouth and face, which I think is disgusting. So I am surprised what people seem to like.
Agreed, they are - but that doesn't stop them from breaking out and getting dry peeling skin. That's still going to take time in photoshop to get rid of. When I was researching newborn photography I was kind of surprised by how much they photoshop these babies. It's crazy and that's why I won't offer it anymore. Once was enough!
Surprised nobody has mentioned this yet but editing away bars and glass reflections from zoo shots is the bane of my life! Ofc it's easier to get rid of the problem during the shooting but when you have an excellent image and a bar across a key feature it frustrates me to no end :c
Cutting out frizzy hair is my ultimate bane. It NEVER quite looks right even after hours of work. (Although refine edge has really made it better in the last couple years)
Also fashion skin retouching where the goal is to make perfect skin but maintain the skin texture. It isn't all that hard but it takes freaking FOREVER.
I also hate having to fix creases in the neck. I always find that because the neck tends to be in shadow and right beside the jaw line that the healing brush tool hasn't the slightest clue what to do so it leads to a lot of manual work
Oh and finally, fly away hairs. I don't mind the odd one but when the entire head is completely surrounded by them I die a little inside.
Nose hair and monobrows. It's not that they're difficult, they just make me feel a little ill. You'd think if someone was going to come in to take their picture a little personal grooming might be the way forward.
Incidentally this isn't about any of the models I've worked with, just the corporate shoots I've done. Model turning up with unruly nose hair... Ick!
HAHAHAHAHAHA I've had, while working as a make up artist, models show up with god awful unattended eyebrows, chipped nail polish, etc. You would think that they might take everything into consideration but nope - they just want to sit there and look pretty. It's frustrating when the photogs and the MUAs and hair stylists are working their butts off trying to get a polished photo and here comes Chewbacca. However, I haven't had to deal with this problem as a photographer yet.
Restoring old photos is pure tedium and two hours of it will leave you a nervous wreck. My parents have boxes of old photos and some of them have been folded, have fly specks, are faded and so on and some of these things date back to the 20s. Only way to fix them is one pixel at a time.
georgewjohnsonFeatured By OwnerDec 31, 2012Hobbyist Photographer
The sources are so inconsistent and so many different techniques for the various messes that they get into. I don't mind doing one or two every so often when asked but they are bloody nightmare and you're glad to see the back of them when you're done. Spend most of the time cursing the people who let their photos get into such a state in the first place, LOL!
My mother-in-law was the worst, she went through a mental phase of cutting out people she didn't like so when my wife found all the old photos she had to match a stack of heads and bodies back to their source photos before she could start scanning them.
I repaired one once for my mom. I was nit picky enough about it and it was a small photo. I couldn't see myself offering that service! That could be nerve-wracking, being trusted with such precious piece of history.
I would hate to do it as a service, mainly because most people don't have a clue. Any image I've ever been given to edit something out or change has been a low-res photo that's basically neigh on impossible to adjust or look better. This would then cause me to put in less effort and adopt the attitude have the attitude "Oh sod it, the photo sucks anyway, and it's a small crappy one - they're not going to care much anyway"
The last two I did were 8x10s and each had been folded into quarters, cracking the emulsion. There were also a bunch of little spiderweb cracks running through them. All of those had to be filled in and each one took almost a month.
I hate cutting hair out but adding to it/making it longer I don't mind. I had to learn that pretty quickly with horses and it's a pretty seamless transition with people, but it has to be just right or it looks all LSAJDASJDKLKASJD.